Paneled vs Flex axles vs Model Team

[aol000xw]

From what I have seen there are three main distinct body building techniques:

• Mostly Flex Axles with some panel here and there (light , expensive, may look a bit raw)
  
• Mostly panels with or without flex axles (heavy, cheaper, takes skill to look good without flex axles)
  
• Model Team. (heavy, looks really good if well done, somewhat less technic)
  

There are great MOCs out there for every style, so it is not about one being better than other.

I am budgeting for a big Lego purchase on January and have some vague ideas of what I want to build but not on how I want to build it.

So perhaps a bit of feedback on the matter may help me make my ideas straight

[Blakbird]

I am budgeting for a big Lego purchase on January and have some vague ideas of what I want to build but not on how I want to build it.

Why don't you start by telling us what you'd like to build? It is pretty hard to give feedback if we have no idea what you are doing.

As for the rest, each style has merit. What to choose is entirely up to you and what you like. You've identified the differences in cost and weight, so if either of those things is important to your design, then you are already pointed in a certain direction.

[piterx]

Well, if you're looking for good performances of your mocs the lighter they are the better they'll perform :)

I usually don't like over paneled cars... Probably the best looking ones are those that get as close as possible to tlg ones

[Corvette3]

Sorry if i sound stupid but, can someone explain model team or point me to more info? this seems like a good time to ask.

[aol000xw]

2legoornot2lego trucks are the kind of Model Team I was thinking when I made the post

I don't have plans for a single model.When I said vague I really meant it. I am waiting for my SBricks for experimenting with fast cars and I know that in that case weight is the main criteria. However I would want to give a try to some heavy machinery, where weight is of no concern.

[piterx]

how did u get an Sbrick :P?

i wrote to the guy that's making em but he didn't answer me back :\

[aol000xw]

I did not get it yet, I am waiting to get it, from the kickstarter campaign.

[Freekysch]

I think my favorite Lego Technic model is 8285 in matter of looks. I think it looks great and somehow like a Model Team design. 8258 is great looking too and it uses panels mainly, so that is ok too !

[Lipko]

Depends. It's much easier to make the body of existing cars with few panels and more connectors+flex axles than building a mostly panel-filled body.

It is much easier to build custom models than real ones from mostly panels (at least for me. Two examples of the first two techniques: V12 Coupé and Audi RS5)

By the way, I think there is a 4th and 5th distinct building style. I don't really like the 4th style but seems to be popular, (so it's just my opinion):

-filling the gaps in the body with whatever that fits there. Heavy, looks messy, but somehow most people are too much hole-phobic and they forgive this messy look.

-fully filled body with panels + stacked beams. Only a very few builders (BrunoJJ, SpiderBrick) are masters in this. Looks very realistic (it's hard to tell it's Lego at first glance). For some reason, quite many people dislike stacked beams. Is it "inherently" bad because of the fact that the accumulated height of stacked beams is not precisely an integer multiple of a modulo?

I have to add that I love models made with this technique, but I would never use it. myself...

My English is quite poor tonight.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Lipko

[bonox]

For some reason, quite many people dislike stacked beams.

As you've said, some people make it work very well, but for me, it depends on what you're trying to represent.

The brain is very good at filling in 'holes' for want of a better word. If you are modelling a curved surface, a slab of stacked beams is obviously flat and just doesn't look right. You're better off in that case putting in something lighter with gaps and then letting your brain imagine the shape in between. If you're modelling something that really is a flat plate, then the stacked beams to me become pretty much the same as a flat plane of model team style bricks. Quite a few of the bigger trucks look great using the stacked approach. Curvy cars - not so much.

Like many things though, there is much skill and artistry in making something visually appealing, even if the subject is mainly mechanical.

[piterx]

actually i'd like to build something like a real car

i mean something that has a studless chassis and studded panels with smooth plates on it to make the body....it would feel so realistic :P

[aol000xw]

Based on your experience do scale become a factor when choosing the building method?

For example does Technic base with model team body require a "minimum size" to start getting good results? Do the these techniques gain or lose appeal on bigger/smaller scales?

[Jeroen Ottens]

Based on your experience do scale become a factor when choosing the building method?

For example does Technic base with model team body require a "minimum size" to start getting good results? Do the these techniques gain or lose appeal on bigger/smaller scales?

Modelteam can be built in any scale. There are more then enough different bricks for that + you can stack bricks without looking 'wrong' like stacked beams would do (in my view).

A panelled model can be made small or medium most easily. But after a certain size the panels become small with respect to the model / surfaces you want to model. It is more difficult (or at least I find it more difficult) to model big surfaces with panels.

For flex-axle models there is a similar effect. After a certain size you need elongated flexaxles. That intermediate connection breaks the flow of the axle somewhat.

[Meatman]

There is also the style of placing beams over flex axles to get curves and give a solid appearance.

[aol000xw]

For me that and stacking beams are technics within the paneled style rather than styles.

[Hrafn]

-fully filled body with panels + stacked beams. Only a very few builders (BrunoJJ, SpiderBrick) are masters in this. Looks very realistic (it's hard to tell it's Lego at first glance). For some reason, quite many people dislike stacked beams. Is it "inherently" bad because of the fact that the accumulated height of stacked beams is not precisely an integer multiple of a modulo?

I have to add that I love models made with this technique, but I would never use it. myself...

For me, stacked beams look good only if they meet the following criteria:

1) they are representing a flat area (or a faceted area, if bent liftarms are used)

2) the beams are all or mostly the same length

The first echoes what bonox said - if the area being modeled isn't flat, it often looks better to suggest it and leave some gaps than to fill it in with the wrong shape.

The second may just be a quirk of mine, but it drives me crazy to see a solid wall of liftarms with dents in it where one liftarm ends and the next begins.